Monthly Archives: January 2013

Post navigation

Why do you see the splinter that is in your brother’s eye,but not the log that is in your own eye? Matthew 7:3

As a Jew and a teacher at American Jewish University, I don’t quote the Gospels too frequently. Yet, this verse from Matthew is too appropriate to pass over. It demands serious moral introspection. We Americans need to ask ourselves some questions about the critical eyes we cast on others and our own episodes of moral blindness.

We are appropriately outraged about the terrible rape story from India and how, after a young woman was gang raped, beaten and thrown into traffic, the response of the government was official indifference. Women, and some men, are demonstrating against what they’re characterizing as a culture of misogyny and violence against women, as well as a legal system that refuses to charge rapists and fails to convict 75% of those charged.

This is a real and important story that deserves coverage. But where is our introspection and awareness of our misogyny and tolerance of violence against women? Where is the coverage of the sexual violence perpetrated against women in our military? We cover it, but on page 16 below the fold. A woman is more likely to be physically assaulted or raped by her fellow soldiers than injured in a combat zone. Nor are women safe in our elite military academies. This is a scandal. While I’m not suggesting we let our coverage slip concerning the outrage in India, we neither have nor deserve to occupy the moral high ground here.

Our coverage of the health crises of our leaders isn’t much different from Venezuela and the deteriorating condition of Hugo Chavez. I felt a deep sense of irony at the complaints by our media that Chavez’ condition was unknown and that he had been out of public sight for three weeks. On the same website was a story about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who had also been out of sight for the very same three weeks. Her medical condition was also unknown and the subject of speculation. Some were questioning the reality of her illness and the story about fainting and falling. What was clear was a lack of clarity both home and abroad. Her medical privacy may be good or bad, but again, we are not on some unique high ground.

Finally, there is our smug sense of superiority concerning our tolerance of religious diversity. We are good. Yes, blessed among nations and I am not going to argue that we are as violent and intolerant as Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Yet, we might benefit from a bit of humility. It’s easy and proper for us to decry Al Qaeda destroying the ancient shrines built by their fellow Muslims—indeed fellow Sunnis. The destruction of the Sufi shrines in Mali is horrible—an affront to religion and to history. So was the destruction by the Taliban of the great Buddha carvings in Afghanistan. While it’s true that shrines, saints and statues are affronts to orthodox Sunni Islam, most of us would argue to save them for reasons of history, art and culture. We’d argue that their importance transcends narrow sectarianism and we should all learn to accept our glorious diversity.

I would certainly make this argument. Yet, this past holiday season, as I strolled along the palisades in Santa Monica, the Christian Crèches that have been there as long as I can remember (which, being a native, is pretty long) were missing. Also missing was the compensatory Menorah added more recently. Why were they banished? They offended non-believers. I’d like to be able to brag that we didn’t resort to violence and destruction, merely politics and injunction, but that wouldn’t be entirely true. Some Christmas displays were vandalized across the land. Yes, certainly our manners are better and we are far less violent, but it isn’t clear that we are much more tolerant of the faiths and traditions of others. We all seem to demand a land free of offense. This is a contradiction. We can’t be both free to be our selves and be free from being offended.